[Trinidad]

DavidKok, on 2021-April-11, 02:52, said:

3♦ should be a specific hand type because it takes up bidding room. But the same principle applies to opener's rebid - no need to jump four levels on slam auctions. Take your time and explore the options. I think this focus on ace-asking bids is premature, especially if there is uncertainty about the length of the diamond suit. And to clarify: the system I play adheres to the idea that a jump to 3♦ should be specific, but it is far from optimal. The hands shown just happen to be a good fit for the simple system.

I argued that as soon as North shows 6 diamonds with two of the top 3 honors (with his 3♦ response) South should bid 7NT. There is no reason to ask for aces, whether by Blackwood, Minorwood or Ron Wood. South knows that there are 13 top tricks in NT and that every suit is controled. Why would you want to "take time and explore the options" when you know that 7NT is the right contract? The only option I see is that partner misunderstands your exploring and you end up playing in 4NT or something silly like that. Those are not options I wish to explore.

Rik

[DavidKok]

Trinidad, on 2021-April-11, 13:26, said:

I argued that as soon as North shows 6 diamonds with two of the top 3 honors (with his 3♦ response) South should bid 7NT. There is no reason to ask for aces, whether by Blackwood, Minorwood or Ron Wood. South knows that there are 13 top tricks in NT and that every suit is controled. Why would you want to "take time and explore the options" when you know that 7NT is the right contract? The only option I see is that partner misunderstands your exploring and you end up playing in 4NT or something silly like that. Those are not options I wish to explore.

Rik

Partner's 3♦ does not promise the jack, where are the 13 top tricks? Also who said anything about the 'woods?

[Trinidad]

DavidKok, on 2021-April-11, 14:56, said:

Partner's 3♦ does not promise the jack, where are the 13 top tricks? Also who said anything about the 'woods?

Partner's 3♦ did not promise the jack, but you don't need the jack to make 7NT the obvious bid.
You are essentially asking two questions:
1. Do you want to be in a grand opposite six diamonds headed by the AK?
2. What grand should it be?

Let's start with question 2:
As I said above, 7NT will fail if partner doesn't have the jack, diamonds split 4-0 (the wrong way) and nothing else good happens. But if the diamonds split 4-0 the wrong way, you are never going to make 7♦, while there is a small possibility that you can make 7NT. In addition, in 7NT you cannot suffer a ruff at trick 1. Therefore 7NT is a better contract than 7♦.

And now for question 1:
Do you want to be in a grand?
The grand has a 90% probability of making opposite ♦AK6542 and nothing else, the worst hand that partner could have. (Diamonds splitting 2-2 or 3-1 = 90 %). That means that you want to bid it even if he has that worst hand. There is no bad news that partner can give you, other that that he missorted his hand, that will stop you from bidding 7NT.
Additional questions ("How many diamonds do you have?", "Do you have the jack?") could tell you that the grand is 100 %, but they don't answer the question whether you should bid it. The 3♦ response already showed that.

DavidKok, on 2021-April-11, 14:56, said:

Also who said anything about the 'woods?

You did:

DavidKok, on 2021-April-11, 02:52, said:

I think this focus on ace-asking bids is premature

And I argued that ace asking bids are not merely premature, but simply unnecessary if you already have the information that 7NT is the right contract to bid.

Rik

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-April-11, 06:55, said:

I asked the question because I would bid this one as 26, it's a really powerful hand making a grand opposite QJxxx, xxx, Ax(x), xx(x) and ♦AKJxx and out

I agree it's worth 26, but I would bid it 25 to maintain the better systems on over 2N.
Although I think the hand you cite would find grand over 3N anyway (4♥ transfer and control-bidding).

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2021-April-12, 06:18, said:

I agree it's worth 26, but I would bid it 25 to maintain the better systems on over 2N.
Although I think the hand you cite would find grand over 3N anyway (4♥ transfer and control-bidding).

The first hand is not difficult, it's more an issue with the second (♦AKJxx and out) where you may never get to find out it's AKJxx rather than AKx and partner just bids 6N not visualising a grand is even in the picture as you need an off the scale good 25.